So, a legislative committee can simply repeal a statute without actually proposing a statutory amendment for consideration by the legislative branch where it is also subject thereafter to possible veto by the governor?

I thought that the power to declare a statute invalid was reserved to the judiciary by the Oregon Constitution.

This business of avoiding an official duty to enforce a law by reason of feelings that one might (with highly variable certainty and limited judicial/public scrutiny) lose in court is a bigger problem facing "democracy" than the republication of electronic versions of the statutes.

The statute certainly didn't require anything near the outrageous claims that this committee had heretofore been asserting. They were right to mellow out.

This is typical of the left wing liberal criminals that screw us on a regular basis. Don't get me wrong there is literally no difference as a general rule between the parties. "Let us hide the laws that we snuck in from the people so we can always screw them and be legal." What half wit in a suit would presume to keep the written laws of the state from the scrutiny of the people.

What Jack said. The statute gives the Legislative Counsel Committee the authority to make determinations about copyright -- it doesn't require them to assert it in any specific way.

Also -- the possibility of further action was certainly left open, from the comments of the legislators on the committee. There was only so much that was going to happen at one meeting.

A legislative delegation of authority to one or another agency, or public entity, to carry out a legislative policy choice -- to the exclusion of any other agency or public entity -- could be construed to be optional at an agency's sole discretion only so long as the policy choice also resides with such agency and not the legislature.

I am reminded of Reagan's refusal to use money that was appropriated specifically to promote solar power.
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2000/03/solar.html

Any announcement that the subject legislative committee action, as opposed to formal legislative action as a whole, is hardly something to trumpet as a triumph for "democracy."

Procedural limitations for ordinary legislation could be viewed as just ordinary technicalities, just as some pro-authoritarians routinely characterize the bill the rights.